The One-Question Story Waiting to be Told

Doug Brown - a grad student at Kent State and a former student in my computer-assisted reporting class - has done some excellent reporting for Deadspin.   His report on the track coach at the University of Toledo  details a man who appears to have spent a career sexually harassing his female athletes.

A comparison between Doug's report and that in the Toledo Blade is a worthwhile editorial exercise.   Doug reports in detail on Coach Kevin Hadsell.   The Blade either hadn't done nearly as much reporting and therefore didn't have as much material or it intentionally minimized the behavior of a coach no responsible program would want anywhere near a woman's team or behind the wheel with a load of student athletes.

But there's one direct question that needs to be answered by the University of Toledo.   What steps is it taking to encourage other victims to come forward (and will some of those victims say they reported problems to university officials who did nothing)?   Whatever the answer, it's a story.

I'm sure Doug will be asking the question.   What about the Blade?  

One reason we see so many scandals in college athletics is because the press fails to do its job.   Too often, the local press doesn't report; it plays cheerleader.   When it comes to college athletics, in many newsrooms reporters don't even control their own story.  As sports commentator Bruce Hooley explains, the team decides.

Actual reporters, reporters like Doug Brown, don't play that game.   Reporters like Doug Brown follow the information and ask the questions that need to be asked.     With all the problems in college athletics, it's time local sports reporters put down their pom poms and pick up their pens.

                                                                             ###

Super Bowl Questions for Parents & Reporters

For possibly the first time ever during all the Super Bowl super hype, there are finally questions about brain trauma and concussions.   USA Today did a worthwhile piece.

Read the complaint filed by the players against the league.   It's truly astounding how much information the league had about the risks of concussions and how it withheld that information from players.  To examine the risk of concussions, it chose someone with no expertise in brain trauma to head up its study team.   It reminds one of how the tobacco companies sponsored junk science to fight the real science that showed how dangerous it is to smoke cigarettes.

The NFL, a multibillion dollar business, withheld vital safety information from its employees.  How would you feel about working at a company where management knew of serious risks and withheld that information from you?

At the professional level in many occupations there's a risk, and often, the higher the risk the higher the pay.   Years ago I had the opportunity for an interesting position in Iraq.   Lots of money.  Appealing.   My daughter said, "I'll tackle you at the plane if you go."    I didn't go.   Professional football players now know the risks.    Professionals can make the decision.   They can take the money and take the risks.    

But what about colleges and high schools?   Their mission isn't the same as the NFL; their mission isn't to make money.   Their mission is education.   So with the knowledge we now have, where even the professionals get asked about the risks before the biggest game of the year, where are the reporters at the local level?
 
Where are the questions from sports reporters and education reporters and health reporters to college presidents and high school superintendents? College presidents and superintendents are supposed to be concerned about education and the development, not the bashing, of a young person's brain.   How is a university's mission of education consistent with a sport medical science has shown causes brain damage?    Why aren't reporters asking more questions and pressing for answers?    If you're concerned about the brain development of your child, it's something to think about on Super Bowl Sunday.

When journalism fails, bad things happen.
                                                              ###

MLK Day

What a wonderful man to celebrate, a man concerned with the score of life and not the score of a game.   How would a man so concerned and dedicated to the greater issues view the state of the press now?

Certainly, the press did not lead when it comes to civil rights.   But there were bold journalists like the late Gene Patterson.   As the obituary rightly states, "he made a mark."

Where are the bold journalists now?   How many news organizations are there truly dedicated to substantive reporting?  What would Dr. King think of a press that dedicates more time to reporting on the imaginary dead girlfriend of a football player than it does to climate change?  What would Dr. King's dream be today?
                                                       ###

Sports Illustrated = Lawsuit in Waiting

It doesn't matter what the deadline is.   If there are major holes and questions about a story, don't publish, don't push, don't broadcast.

Manti Te'o tells a compelling story.   It's understandable a reporter would initially believe that this affable and talented college football player is telling the truth.   But to do any feature story, a reporter needs details.   There's a car accident.   That means there's an accident report with details, that means there are most likely pictures.   There's a young girl who has died.   That means there's an obituary.   This is the girlfriend of a famous college football player.   There are going to be lots of articles.   This young woman would have had lots of friends.

The reporter can't find any of this, and Sports Illustrated publishes?   If the sign says "BRIDGE OUT - DANGER - 1000 FOOT DROP AHEAD" Sports Illustrated editors would drive the bus into the gorge.

The headline in the Atlantic gets it right:

The Manti Te'o Dead-Girlfriend Hoax: Blame the Media

What editors approved this story?  What questions did they ask?  How does a piece with one red flag after another go forward?  Journalism requires verification.   If Sports Illustrated has forgotten that simple basic requirement of journalism, perhaps its editors should consider going to work for Roger Ailes.  Lots of so-called sports reporters did copy & paste of facts that weren't facts because nobody bothered to check.   Click here to read one of the exclusives Fox Sports did on the poor dead fictional girlfriend of Te'o when Fox Sports didn't realize the girl wasn't dead because the girl wasn't real.  

For all those organizations that did copy and paste instead of actual reporting  a word of caution:  you're a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Journalism requires verification.   In court, saying you copied and pasted from someone else won't work as a defense.

                                                                  ###

Baseball Writer Hypocrites

How long do you think the steroid era in baseball would have lasted had sports reporters investigated the story in front of their face at game after game?   Baseball writers watch a player's neck size double and triple and don't see a perfectly obvious story to investigate?   Those bulging muscles didn't come from eating Cheerios guys.   Knock! Knock!  Anyone home in that reporting head of yours?

With the money involved, one can understand why a professional athlete would be inclined to cheat.   One can understand why the aging athlete might be inclined to cheat.   It's not ethical, but it's understandable.   It's also understandable why Baseball Writers didn't investigate.  There's a difference between being a writer and being a journalist.   There's a difference between being a reporter and being a cheerleader.

Had there been more reporters and fewer cheerleaders, the steroid era would have been short lived.  Any activity has to be placed in the context of the time.   Baseball has certainly taken steps to clean up its act.   What about the writers?  There were lots of stories about nobody being voted into the Hall of Fame.  Did you see many about the baseball writers who failed to report on the problem at the time?

Anyone wanting to be an actual sports reporter can benefit from listening to this video from Bruce Hooley, a sports talkshow host who was fired for criticizing Ohio State.  

When journalism fails, bad things happen.

                                                                    ###

Time to Cover the Real Crime Scene: Congress

Asking the simple, direct question is so simple.   Why aren't more local reporters doing it?

Health and safety experts have done all kinds of research on the dangers and risks posed by automobiles.   As a result, there's been knowledge applied to reduce the risk and save lives.

Guns?  Thousands die every year from guns.  From a health and safety and societal standpoint, any reasonable person, even one with no scientific research background, would agree that it makes sense to examine the issues surrounding gun deaths just as we've studied and analyzed automobile deaths.   But no, that's not done.   That area of inquiry is not allowed.  Congress voted to prohibit such research by the CDC.  

As the viewpoint article in the Journal of the American Medical Association by Doctors Kellermann and Rivara points out, gun research has been silenced.   One primary contributing factor is the silence of the press.    

Why did your member of Congress vote for or against the measure?   Try to find that in your local newspaper or local television station.   If it's not there, write to the corporate owners of the paper and TV station and ask why?    Here are a couple of notable paragraphs from the JAMA article and a caution for viewers of FOX NEWS.  The following paragraphs contain facts.

"Injury prevention research can have real and lasting effects. Over the last 20 years, the number of Americans dying in motor vehicle crashes has decreased by 31%.1 Deaths from fires and drowning have been reduced even more, by 38% and 52%, respectively.1 This progress was achieved without banning automobiles, swimming pools, or matches. Instead, it came from translating research findings into effective interventions.

Given the chance, could researchers achieve similar progress with firearm violence? It will not be possible to find out unless Congress rescinds its moratorium on firearm injury prevention research. Since Congress took this action in 1997, at least 427 000 people have died of gunshot wounds in the United States, including more than 165 000 who were victims of homicide.1 To put these numbers in context, during the same time period, 4586 Americans lost their lives in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.10

The United States has long relied on public health science to improve the safety, health, and lives of its citizens. Perhaps the same straight  forward, problem-solving approach that worked well in other circumstances can help the nation meet the challenge of firearm violence. Otherwise, the heartache that the nation and perhaps the world is feeling over the senseless gun violence in Newtown will likely be repeated, again and again."

Local television reporters cover shooting after shooting after shooting.   It's time they actually cover the real crime scene:  Congress.

When journalism fails, bad things happen.

                                                             ###

Reporter's Question: How Do You Pay For It?

As Walter Pincus points out in today's Washington Post, "Iraq and Afghanistan are the first U.S. wars in which the American public was not asked to pay a cent in additional taxes."   We put it on the credit card, and as Pincus asks, "what were we thinking?"

A better question is why wasn't the press asking?   Why weren't reporters at every local newspaper and television station asking their members of Congress why they approved of putting a war on the national credit card?  All politics is local.  Scan the archives of your newspaper and local TV stations.  How many polled their members of Congress to find out why the members wanted to charge the war instead of paying for it?   We have a huge war debt because the local reporters failed to ask their members of Congress a simple, direct question.

Don't hold your breath waiting for reporters to ask questions or for members of Congress to answer.  When my reporting students sent certified letters to the Ohio Congressional delegation, letters that included the student's name, phone, and email making a response incredibly easy, most members did not respond to a simple request asking about an important topic:  healthcare.

But the failure is not with members of Congress.   And the failure is not with local reporters.  Let's change the topic to the present and run through the same scenario, i.e., ask a basic question to hold the member accountable.

How does every member of your state's delegation feel about banning the sale of assault weapons and large capacity gun magazines?   Can you find that story posted on your local newspaper or TV web site?  Why do local news organizations fail to ask questions that need to be asked and fail to hold their members of Congress accountable?   That's not a problem with the reporters, that's a management problem. Why are the heads of Belo and Scripps and Gannett and Tribune not demanding such simple direct reporting be done?

The media industry is undergoing an incredible upheaval, but those who will not only survive but also thrive will be those that decide to do news that matters instead of blather that doesn't.  

When journalism fails, bad things happen.   And when journalism fails, so will businesses that have forgotten that journalism is their product.

                                                              ###
                         

Direct Gun Questions

It doesn't get any easier than this.   Does your member of Congress support or oppose banning the sale of assault weapons?   They are unbelievably easy to buy.  Does your member of Congress support or oppose the sale of weapons at gun shows?    

Will your local TV station or newspaper ask the questions?

When journalism fails, bad things happen.  

                                                            ###

Where have you gone Rocky Marciano?

In 1955, possibly the most celebrated athlete was Rocky Marciano, the heavyweight champion.   I asked my students yesterday, "who is the current heavyweight champion?"   Not one student knew.   We no longer celebrate a sport where the goal is to render the opponent unconscious.      How long do you suppose we will celebrate the current most popular sport, one where its retired members have a tendency to commit suicide induced by the brain damage caused by the sport?

"Son, be sure to text while you drive" = "Son, be sure to play football."  Best of luck with that brain of yours.  

Retired NFL players are telling their own children not to play.  When do you think a college president may figure out a sport designed for violent collisions is not consistent with a university's mission of education?  When do you think sports reporters will start asking college presidents if a sport that causes brain damage is consistent with a university's mission?  Most likely, that won't happen until the lawsuits start coming and depositions are taken.

During Rocky Marciano's era, we had the tobacco industry.  What they sold to the public was a lie, one horribly detrimental to public health.  And as the lawsuits came, it was apparent the industry knew of the dangers and failed to disclose them.   Today, we have a similar threat to public health targeted to our sons.   And if you read the complaint filed by the NFL players against the league, you'll see amazingly striking similarities in the league's behavior and that of the tobacco companies.  

Later today, my computer-assisted reporting class hopefully launches a project it has produced on concussions.   Despite all the publicity about concussions, my students found school superintendents who don't even know if their school has a concussion policy.    My student reporters found several Ohio high schools that do not track concussions.   They also found a school district (Chillicothe) that is doing a first-rate job.  It has a detailed policy, one that requires immediate notification of the parent if there is ever a suspected concussion.  My students also discovered a school district where the football players must run around covered with pillows saying "careful, careful, careful" as they run their plays, because this is a school district that says it has not had an athletic concussion in 9 years.

What's happening at your school?   Does it track all concussions in games and practice?   Does it require concussion education for all coaches?   Does it require immediate notification of the parent for any suspected concussion injury?  That's an easy story for any reporter in any market to do.    But to do that story, you have to put down your pom poms and pick up your pen.

                                                         ###

Because It's Football...

The students in my computer-assisted reporting class are about to launch a project on concussions.  We called high schools around the state to ask a couple basic questions:   does your school track all concussions in games and practice?  Does your school require mandatory concussion education for all coaches?

When I asked the superintendent of one of the powerhouse high school football programs in Ohio whether his school tracks all concussions in games and practice, he responded "no comment."

My student journalists found Ohio high schools that have no concussion policies. They found superintendents who don't even know if the school has a concussion policy.   They also found what must be a program where the student athletes wear helmets and run around with pillows and say "careful, careful, careful" as they run their plays.   My students found a high school that says it has not suffered an athletic concussion in 9 years.  As a colleague of mine who is familiar with the school system said, "they have more concussions than that in the hallway."

So here are some questions that journalists - not cheereleaders - should be asking.   Why don't they?  The answer is simple:  because it's football.

Why would university presidents support an activity that causes brain damage?

Why would parents support an activity that causes brain damage?   (Full disclosure:  I certainly would have allowed my son to play.   Now?   Never.   We are today with football where we were in the 1950's when you could page through a magazine and find an advertisement where a doctor told you the best cigarette to smoke.)

How could any high school not require mandatory concussion education training for all coaches?

How could any high school not require immediate parent notification of any suspected concussion?

Why aren't school superintendents asking legal counsel how the increased knowledge we now have about concussions has affected the litigation potential for the school district?

Why aren't university j-school directors pushing student journalists to ask the above questions? 

If your school district is in need of a knowledgeable attorney, check with the attorney who wrote the Athletic Concussion Protection Act of 2011 for the District of Columbia, Joseph Cammarata.  I just did a videoskype interview with him for our student reporting project.   When it comes to concussions, he is a wealth of information.  

And if your son is heading out to play what's become the number one sport in America ask yourself one question:  would you tell your son, "be sure to text while you drive."   Would you want him to take that risk?   What risk do you want your son to take with his brain? 

As the CDC points out, concussions are serious brain injuries.   In most concussions, the athlete never loses consciousness.   We will continue to play sports.   The problem usually doesn't come from the initial concussion; it comes from the player being put back into play, taking another hit to a brain that's already been rattled.   That's what happened to the high school athlete that prompted the law to protect high school athletes in the state of Washington.   Ohio has no such law.   Why?   Why do you think?   Because it's football.  

                                                           ###

A Veterans Day Apology

On Veterans Day, NBC, CBS, ABC, the Washington Post and the New York Times owe our nation and its veterans an apology.   Had the press done its job, there would not have been a war in Iraq.  But rather than ask the questions that needed to be asked, the press played cheerleader.

When Journalism fails, bad things happens.   In this case brave men and women died who shouldn't have.  Thousands more have been scarred.  Thousands of American families have suffered loss and pain they never would have had to endure had the press done its job.

                                                            ###

PS:  FOX isn't included because Fox is brilliant.   It's the most magnificently designed profit generating propaganda organization in the history of communication.  I remember being in the Republic of Georgia during the run up to war watching my satellite channel and seeing a FOX News sponsored war rally.  It was great teaching material for students at the Caucasus School of Journalism & Media Management in Tbilisi as we discussed what is and isn't journalism.   The performance of the press we witnessed during the run up to war was not journalism.   On the propaganda front, FOX was and continues to be the clear winner. 

Required Reading For Journalists

If this is required reading for journalists, in this day and age, not that many people will have to read it.   There aren't that many journalists.  There are lots of human microphone stands.   There are lots of sports pom pom wavers.   There are lots of business cheerleaders.   But unfortunately, journalists, those people who ask the questions that need to be asked, who dig, who don't take no for an answer, who go after the records and who seek verification rather than spending their time playing he said/she said, there aren't all that many of those.

So let me give this blog another title:  required reading for anyone in a journalism school or working in any organization that pretends to do news.

Read Dan Gillmor's column in the Guardian.   Then go ask your editor or news director one question:   should we start doing journalism or just keep doing the crap we're doing?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/07/big-media-failure-fourth-estate-election

When journalism fails, bad things happen.
                                                         ###

Sandy Demonstrates Failure of Press

The devastation caused by Sandy should have surprised nobody who believes in science.  As the headline in the New York Times said,  "For Years, Warnings That It Could Happen Here."

What serious questioning did Romney and Obama get about global warming?   Romney joked about it at his convention.  

Global warming is not a joke and there's certainly nothing funny or humorous about the failure of the press to ask serious questions about a serious issue.  Twenty-five years ago, most likely you would have seen hour-long documentaries on the networks addressing such an issue.   Now, the networks care about the exact same thing as BP, stock price and executive compensation.

How does such a serious issue go totally unquestioned by trained journalists at the presidential debates?   What's happening in your market?   Are your local reporters questioning each and every member of the Congressional delegation on the issue?   If not, write to the general manager of your local TV stations.   Write to the editor of your local newspaper.   Ask them why their reporters are failing to ask questions that need to be asked.   And for your newspapers, try to find the most in-depth videoskype interview its done with a climate scientist or politician on the issue.   If there is no such interview, ask your editor to explain why the newspaper doesn't bother to utilize today's technology to report. 

When journalism fails, bad things happen.

                                                                 ###

An Exercise for Your Racist

Unfortunately, we can forget about the American television networks devoting any substantive time to one major problem facing the country:  racism.   But this election season does provide an opportunity to confront it.   Here's an exercise for you to do with your nearest racist.   There shouldn't be any trouble finding them.   They are in every community.

Print out the presidential endorsement from the Salt Lake Tribune.   Read it point by point to your racist.  Ask your racist to respond to each point.  That will be sure to cause cognitive dissonance.  And it's impossible to create behavioral change without first creating cognitive dissonance.

The Salt Lake Tribune uses logic, reason, and facts.   Racism, of course, doesn't allow logic or reason or facts.   Ask your racist to use logic, reason and facts when responding to each point made by the Salt Lake Tribune endorsement and watch closely.   You may actually observe cognitive dissonance.   You may actually have the opportunity to see the point where the racist shows that ever so slight movement away from racism and toward thought and reason.   More than likely, the racist simply won't listen.   The racist will simply ignore facts and logic.   Reasonable, thoughtful, rational people are not racists.  Rational reasonable fact-based thinking doesn't tolerate racism. Nobody should.
 
Nor should American news organizations consistently fail to address the issue.

When journalism fails, bad things happen.

                                                         ###

Don't Bother Writing to Your Congressman

Students in my computer-assisted reporting class wrote to each member of the Ohio

Congressional Delegation making a simple request.   What happened?   Take a look.